United Nations A Failed Organization

[ajwps]

The following article completely outlines the role of the United Nations and its function in the modern world. It is interesting to see why we need to be associated with this organization which in violation of international law.

The United Nations recently passed another blatantly anti-Israel resolution in support of extremist Arab Palestinian claims. There is no longer any point in entering into any serious dialogue with this organization.

In countless ways, over many years, the UN has proven to be a discredited organization, with lawless elements, which can no longer claim to have any moral standing. Very few of its 191 members can be counted upon to put principle ahead of crass expediency.

The hopeful vision that accompanied its founding in 1945 has long since evaporated. It was the United Nations that recognized Israel in 1947. Therefore, the UN has a duty to protect her from forcible extinction and to live up to and enforce the UN Charter. If the UN fails to protect any of her members, including Israel, then all that remains is a stench along the East River.

Mass murder has taken place over the years in a number of places, with no timely response from the UN. There has also been a UN failure to hold responsible human rights violators, and to oppose rogue states seeking the acquisition of weapons of mass murder. The self-interests of dictatorships, police states, anti-Western, anti-democratic and Arab/Islamic-driven theocratic hell-holes continue day in and day out to paralyze any possibility that the UN could ever encourage true justice. Here are just a few examples of major crimes that were ignored by the UN:

* Genocide in Cambodia in the 1970s by the Khmer Rouge, estimated at two million people.

* North Korea starved to death about two million of its own people.

* Saddam Hussein gassed Kurds and slaughtered the Marsh Arabs, while devastating their fragile ecosystem.

* Failure to oppose the spread of WMD in Pakistan, North Korea, Syria, Iraq, Iran, Egypt, Libya, etc.

* Moslem genocide of about two million black southern Sudanese Christians over an 18-year period. Currently, one million people in Sudan have been driven from their homes, with the threat of murdering another 400,000 by the end of 2004.

* Slaughter of 800,000 Tutsis and Hutus in Rwanda.

* Constant terror attacks on Israel, plus the usual calls from Arab and Muslim countries for the destruction of Israel.

* Failure to implement its own resolution for Syrian troop withdrawal from Lebanon following Israel's exit over four years ago.

The membership list of the UN's Human Rights Commission roster says it all. Included are Libya, Syria and Sudan - rogue states that support terror and major violations of human rights. This list is more appropriate for a lineup before a vice squad than for human rights guardians. The foxes are guarding the UN hen house.

In addition, it was recently revealed how Saddam Hussein figuratively 'bought' the UN under the UN's 1995 Oil for Food Program. He was allowed to illegally divert 10% of all transactions to himself and apparently to officials of various collaborating governments, including France, Germany and Russia. Also dipping his fingers into that "oily tithe" was none other than Kofi Annan's own son, one of those on the "Oil for Food" monitoring agency.

Entirely legally, the UN itself received a "commission" on all "Oil for Food" transactions. This became a major revenue source for the UN, giving it a substantial vested interest in continuation of Saddam's regime, under lucrative (for the UN) sanctions.

In return for billions in bribes and legal revenues, the UN and some members of the Security Council opposed any US military action against Saddam Hussein.

After all, why would they not want to drag on the search for a peaceful solution with more years of useless inspections. The Iraqi oil flowed out of the ground and the revenue from that oil flowed into secret bank accounts. Hungry Iraqi children became dead Iraqi children, and America became the ever-convenient "fall guy."

The record is clear. Too clear. It is time to stop the pretense that the UN is anything other than a hopelessly corrupt, ever mischievous, ever-conniving, ever anti-democratic, failed organization. It is time to stop looking to it for any honest brokering and to establish an alternative mechanism for dealing with the world's ills, and this time, let it be "by invitation only."

The UN must be radically overhauled in a way that requires member states to be at least on the road to democracy and all voting rights to be restricted to established, representative democracies. If not, it is time to put the old slogan into effect: get the US out of the UN, and the UN out of the US.

 

[Avatar4321]

I think there are two main problems with the UN that i see at this point.

1)they allow rogue states such as Syria, Iran, North Korea, etc in the UN. Not to mention they put China as one of the permanent members of the security council. If they want an international organization dedicated to peace, they need an organization dedicated to freedom. the UN does not. quite the opposite. much of the time they support oppressive states like they did in Iraq.

2)The UN is not accountable to the people of the world. No one votes who represents them. There is no accountability to the people if there is corruption in the UN. They simply take care of each other and protect them in their power.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by Avatar4321
I think there are two main problems with the UN that i see at this point.

1)they allow rogue states such as Syria, Iran, North Korea, etc in the UN. Not to mention they put China as one of the permanent members of the security council. If they want an international organization dedicated to peace, they need an organization dedicated to freedom. the UN does not. quite the opposite. much of the time they support oppressive states like they did in Iraq.

2)The UN is not accountable to the people of the world. No one votes who represents them. There is no accountability to the people if there is corruption in the UN. They simply take care of each other and protect them in their power.

Any grand concepts of a united world body is doomed to failure for all the reasons you mentioned and more.

 

[HGROKIT]

Originally posted by ajwps
The following article completely outlines the role of the United Nations and its function in the modern world. It is interesting to see why we need to be associated with this organization which in violation of international law.

Could you kindly list the source of this quote?

Thanks

 

[dilloduck]

The words "paper tiger" make them look good. Good idea for a place for countries to express thier opinions. Lousy idea for accomplishing anything but chaos.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by HGROKIT
Could you kindly list the source of this quote?

Thanks

What about this 'United Nations a Failed Organization' article do you question?

http://www.israelnn.com/article.php3?id=3710

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by dilloduck

The words "paper tiger" make them look good. Good idea for a place for countries to express thier opinions. Lousy idea for accomplishing anything but chaos.

Why is it a good forum for world nations to express their opinions when the world has instantaneous ability to have a voice on satelite television coverage (Al-Jazerra), major newspapers on the internet and many other forums? All these immediate nation opinions dissemination negating the need for a group of UN ambassadors talking in an auditorium and with the net effect of nothing but self-serving propoganda.

 

[dilloduck]

Originally posted by ajwps
Why is it a good forum for world nations to express their opinions when the world has instantaneous ability to have a voice on satelite television coverage (Al-Jazerra), major newspapers on the internet and many other forums? All these immediate nation opinions dissemination negating the need for a group of UN ambassadors talking in an auditorium and with the net effect of nothing but self-serving propoganda.

They can do with thier time what they wish. The conversation occurs publicly and avoids the spin of the media. If something postive happens, fine---if not, no big loss. It at least gives peaceful people a method to reslove issues .

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by dilloduck

They can do with thier time what they wish. The conversation occurs publicly and avoids the spin of the media. If something postive happens, fine---if not, no big loss. It at least gives peaceful people a method to reslove issues .

1) The UN member's wish time is being well compensated mainly by American tax dollars.

2) What today comes as a positive from the United Nations?

3) Do you consider all the UN member nations as peaceful people?

4) What issues do the UN member nations exactly resolve?

 

[HGROKIT]

Originally posted by ajwps
What about this 'United Nations a Failed Organization' article do you question?

http://www.israelnn.com/article.php3?id=3710

Actually, at this point, none. It was a simple and friendly request to read the article for myself since you made mention of it. Why do you present the requested information in such an advesarial manner?

 

[rtwngAvngr]

I like dillo's idea of just acknowledging the U.N. for what it is: A place you can go to get a dialogue about issues with other nations. We should recognize that it should not be in charge of security forces and conducting military actions.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by HGROKIT

Actually, at this point, none. It was a simple and friendly request to read the article for myself since you made mention of it. Why do you present the requested information in such an advesarial manner?

Sorry that you got the impression that my answer was adversarial or negative.

But your question seemed to ask for proof of what is actually open and free information for everyone's ability to obtain the same from UN records.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by rtwngAvngr

I like dillo's idea of just acknowledging the U.N. for what it is: A place you can go to get a dialogue about issues with other nations. We should recognize that it should not be in charge of security forces and conducting military actions.

If it is just a very expensive (US tax dollar sinkhole) why should one look to the UN world nation dialogues that have no ability to do anything more than stand up, talk, sit down and let the other nations speak to this or that cause with nothing of any value being derived from same....

 

[dilloduck]

Well revoke it's charter or whatever--I don't realy think anyone here is in love with the organization. Is this what your wanting to hear?

 

[HGROKIT]

Originally posted by ajwps
Originally posted by HGROKIT

Actually, at this point, none. It was a simple and friendly request to read the article for myself since you made mention of it. Why do you present the requested information in such an advesarial manner?

Sorry that you got the impression that my answer was adversarial or negative.

But your question seemed to ask for proof of what is actually open and free information for everyone's ability to obtain the same from UN records.

Well cowboy, your thread, your post. If you aren't going to post your source, don't get your panties in a bunch if someone asks you for it. And I asked nicely at that. I won't do so again.

BTW - I agree with your position as to getting us out of the UN, but not your rationale. As I suspected, you have a specific agenda for doing so as indicated by your quoted source. I am not surprised.

There are far greater reasons for us to get out of the UN than those you seem to subscribe; so let's leave it that we agree the UN is about as useful as tits on a bull.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by dilloduck

Well revoke it's charter or whatever--I don't realy think anyone here is in love with the organization. Is this what your wanting to hear?

If I only had the power to revoke the UN charter but it appears that the United Nations was established on 24 October 1945 by 51 countries committed to preserving peace through international cooperation and collective security.

As Al Gore said, there is no 'overriding legal authority' that could revoke the charter of this useless body.

But if I were to be the president of these United States, I would simply withdraw from this august nation body and stop all US funding to the UN.

Question:

How long would the United Nations function as on a day to day basis without the funds from the United States? Remember that many of the nations never pay any or just a small part of their dues.

 

[ajwps]

Originally posted by HGROKIT

Well cowboy, your thread, your post. If you aren't going to post your source, don't get your panties in a bunch if someone asks you for it. And I asked nicely at that. I won't do so again.

BTW - I agree with your position as to getting us out of the UN, but not your rationale. As I suspected, you have a specific agenda for doing so as indicated by your quoted source. I am not surprised.

There are far greater reasons for us to get out of the UN than those you seem to subscribe; so let's leave it that we agree the UN is about as useful as tits on a bull.

Look here partner there is no overriding legal authority that requires anyone to post a quoted site location if the article is properly designated as a quote.

Well what is your hidden agenda for 'getting out of the UN'?

 

[HGROKIT]

Originally posted by ajwps
Question:

How long would the United Nations function as on a day to day basis without the funds from the United States? Remember that many of the nations never pay any or all of their dues.

I think the UN can do with or without us. They won't have any real clout as we have always been the military and financial back bone. It is at issue as to whether or not we owe dues - but I think not.

The United Nations Debt: Who Owes Whom?
by Cliff Kincaid

The United Nations won't go broke. Whether it should is another question.

http://www.cato.org/dailys/6-15-98.html

See, it is REALLY simple to post your source so people don't have to ask.

 

[HGROKIT]

Originally posted by ajwps
Look here partner there is no overriding legal authority that requires anyone to post a quoted site location if the article is properly designated as a quote.

Well what is your hidden agenda for 'getting out of the UN'?

Actually you are wrong, it is called copyright.

I have no hidden agenda, but you do. I was kind enough not to expose it as I was kind enough to try and end the dicussion with you in somewhat tacit agreement.

But if you want ot go on and on and on about the woah poor is me "endless persecution of the Jews", you go man! But put it out in the open for honest debate and quit couching your terms and postion. You do this in all of your threads.

 

[5stringJeff]

Originally posted by ajwps
Look here partner there is no overriding legal authority that requires anyone to post a quoted site location if the article is properly designated as a quote.

ajwps, you would be wise to read the USMB rules about quoting from other web sources:
http://www.usmessageboard.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=3482